[ Originally published by The Daily Star on 14 May, 2026 ]
A heated exchange took place today at the International Crimes Tribunal-1 between a prosecution witness (victim of enforced disappearance) and the defence counsel of Maj Gen (relieved) Ziaul Ahsan, former director general of National Telecommunication Monitoring Center (NTMC), over allegations of using “objectionable language”.
The incident took place during a hearing on a complaint filed by Nazneen Nahar, sister of Ziaul Ahsan and also his defence counsel, against prosecution witness Lt. Col. Hasinur Rahman.
In the complaint, Nazneen alleged that Hasinur had used objectionable language against her.
The tribunal, led by Justice Md Golam Mortuza Mozumder, held an open-court hearing on the matter and sought Hasinur’s statement over the allegation.
Taking the witness stand, Hasinur said that on November 3 last year, Nazneen had requested the court to ensure that her client was not subjected to intimidation during interrogation. He said that after the court proceedings that day, he told then chief prosecutor Tajul Islam that victims of enforced disappearance were blindfolded and tortured during detention.
“Why should the accused Ziaul Ahsan receive such facilities? I raised my objection over the matter to Tajul,” Hasinur told the tribunal. He denied using any objectionable language against Nazneen. Hasinur also said his university-going daughter had accompanied him that day and questioned how he could use such language in front of her. He, however, admitted that he had been angry at Ziaul.
At this point, Nazneen stood up and told the tribunal that Hasinur was lying and had indeed used objectionable words against her.
As Hasinur continued to deny the allegation, both he and Nazneen became agitated.
At one stage, the tribunal chairman said, “If you cannot resolve the issue among yourselves, then we will have to deliver a judgment based on evidence and testimonies.”
Addressing Hasinur, he said, “Assume that you used objectionable language. If you simply express regret, the matter can be resolved here.”
Hasinur responded: “I did not use such language with her. Even then, if I said anything like that, I express my regret.”
Nazneen, however, told the court, “He must admit his fault and apologise in writing.”
The tribunal chairman then told Nazneen, “If you want, we will proceed to trial over this matter.”
Nazneen responded that CCTV footage of the court would reveal what had actually happened that day.
Later, Prosecutor Shyikh Mahdi alleged before the tribunal that Nazneen was trying to intimidate prosecution witnesses and obstruct the trial.
Prosecutor Abdus Sattar Palwan also alleged that Nazneen had made objectionable remarks against the prosecution on several occasions inside the courtroom.
“One day, Nazneen said in court that the prosecution takes money to delay fixing dates in other enforced disappearance cases, while dates in her client’s case are fixed quickly. But, my lord, it is the court itself that fixes hearing dates. We only assist the court and comply with its directives,” he said.
The tribunal chairman then said, “If anyone makes controversial remarks regarding ICT-1, I will take action. We are conducting the trial transparently. We will not spare anyone.”
Addressing the prosecution, he said, “You have raised these allegations verbally, which I am not taking into cognisance. If submitted in writing, I will consider them.”
The tribunal fixed June 24 for the next hearing on the matter.